CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1.

Continuing crimes committed in different judicial

Rule 110 PROSECUTIONS of Offenses regions

2. Offenses wherein any of the essential elements
1. General Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction were committed in different territorial

over the offense upon the filing of complaint by a jurisdictions

complainant or an information by the prosecuting officer 3. Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle,
aircraft or vessel (see R110, §15)
à Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the accused
upon arrest or surrender; such jurisdiction once gained i. Railroad, train, aircraft

cannot be lost even if accused escapes (Gimenez vs.

(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
Nazareno)
à Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is determined
(2) Place of departure
at the time of the institution of the action and is retained
even if the penalty for the offense is later lowered or (3) Place of arrival
raised (People vs. Lagon)
2. Complaint – sworn written statement charging a person ii. Vessel

with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any

(1) First port of entry
peace officer or other public official charged with the
enforcement of the law violated
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage
Information – accusation in writing charging a person with
an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed with the court e. Libel and written defamation

3. Complaint and Information distinguished:
Complaint
A sworn statement
Subscribed by the offended
party, any peace officer or
other officer charged with
the enforcement of the
law violated
5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal unreasonably
refuses to file an information or include a person therein as
Information
an accused
Need not be sworn to
1. In case of grave abuse of discretion, action
for mandamus
2. Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
Subscribed to by the fiscal 3. Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice

May be filed either with 4. Institute administrative charges against the erring
the court or in the fiscal’s fiscal
office generally to
commence the preliminary 5. File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC
investigation of the (prosecution of offenses)
charges made Filed with the court
6. File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages
(PO refuses or neglects to perform official duty)
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested with
7. Secure appointment of another fiscal
concurrent jurisdiction:
8. Institute another criminal action if no double
jeopardy is involved
1. Features stated in Art. 2, RPC

6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal

à Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first filed
prosecution are not available, EXCEPT
 1. To afford adequate protection to constitutional
rights of accused
2. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice
or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions
3. Pre-judicial question which is sub judice
4. Acts of the officer are without or in excess of
authority
5. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or
regulation
6. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Court has no jurisdiction over the case
8. Case of persecution rather than prosecution
9. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust
for vengeance
10. Clearly no prima facie case against the accused
and MTQ on that ground had been denied
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:
a. In RTC:
à By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the
purpose of conducting requisite preliminary investigation
therein.
b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts:
à By filing the complaint or information directly with said
courts, or a complaint with the fiscal’s office
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts
à By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal
à In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the
period of prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, §1)
d. Offenses subject to summary procedure
[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental
laws; (3) violation of municipal or city ordinances; and (4)
criminal cases where the penalty does not exceed 6 months
or fine of P1000 or both, irrespective of other imposable
penalties and civil liabilities]
à The complaint or information shall be filed directly in
court without need of a prior preliminary examination or
preliminary investigation.
à Zaldivia vs. Reyes – since a criminal case covered by the
Rules of Summary Procedure shall be deemed commenced
only when it is filed in court, then the running of the
prescriptive period shall be halted on the date the case is
actually filed in court and not on any date before that.
à Reodica vs. CA – [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art. 91
of the RPC, the period of prescription shall be interrupted
by the filing of the complaint or information. It does not
distinguish whether the complaint is filed for preliminary
examination or investigation only, or for an action on the
merits. Thus, the filing of the complaint even with the
fiscal’s office should suspend the running of the Statute of
Limitations. The ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all
cases subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since
that particular case involved a violation of an
ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was not
Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (“An Act to Establish
Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized by Special
Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide when
Prescription Shall Begin to Run”), §2 of which provides that
period of prescription is suspended only when judicial
proceedings are instituted against the guilty party.
8. Contents of information
a. Name of the accused
à Information may be amended as to the name of the
accused, but such amendment cannot be questioned for
the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra)
à Error of name of the offended party: if material to the
case, it necessarily affects the identification of the act
charged. Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if
there is a variance between the allegation and the proof as
to the ownership of the property stolen.
b. Designation of offense by statute (or of
section/subsection of statute violated)
à Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law prescribes
a single punishment for various offenses.
à Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances need
to be alleged as they are integral parts of the crime. If
proved, but not alleged, become only generic aggravating
circumstances.
9. Amendment of information and Substitution of
information, distinguished

Substitution
à If facts do not completely allege all the elements of the Amendment

crime charged, the info may be quashed; however, the Involves either formal or Necessarily involves a
substantial changes substantial change
prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include the
necessary facts (People vs. Purisima) Needs leave of court as
Without leave of court if original information has to
before plea be dismissed
c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the
Where only as to form,
offense there is no need for Another preliminary
another preliminary investigation is entailed
investigation and retaking and accused has to plead
à Information need only allege facts, not include all the of plea of accused anew
evidence which may be used to prove such facts (Balitaan
Refers to the same offense
vs. CFI) charged or which
necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in
d. Name of offended party original charges, hence, Requires or presupposes
substantial amendments to that new info involves a
info after plea taken different offense which
e. Approximate time of commission cannot be made over does not include or is not
objections of accused for included in the original
if original info is charge, hence, accused
à Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to withdrawn, accused could cannot claim double
invoke double jeopardy jeopardy
time is only a formal amendment; no need to dismiss case
(People vs. Molero)
10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form,
à A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be
provided
sustained since such would allow the prosecution to prove
an offense distantly removed from the alleged date, thus 1. Leave of court is obtained; and
substantially impairing the rights of the accused to be 2. Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused
informed of the charges against him (People vs. Reyes)
11. When amendment is only as to form
f. Place of commission
1. Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged
à Conviction may be had even if it appears that the crime 2. Charge does not deprive accused of a fair
was committed not at the place alleged, provided that the opportunity to present his defense

place of actual commission was within the court’s 3. Does not involve a change in basic theory of

jurisdiction and accused was not surprised by the variance prosecution

between the proof and the information

12. Exceptions to rule on venue
 1. Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court à The offended party may intervene in the prosecution of
in which charge is first filed) the criminal case because of her interest in it (Banal vs.
2. Continuing offenses Tadeo)
3. Piracy which is triable anywhere
4. Libel (residence; or where first published) 14. Procedure
5. In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and
impartial inquiry 1. Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where
an essential ingredient of the crime took place
13. Special cases (who may prosecute) (territorial jurisdiction)
1. Amendment as a matter of right before
a. Adultery and concubinage plea
2. Amendment upon discretion of the court
à Only offended spouse can be complainant after plea
à Inclusion of other accused is only a formal amendment
à Both guilty parties must be included in complaint
which would not be prejudicial to the accused and should
be allowed (People vs. CA)
b. Crimes against chastity

d. After plea and before judgment, if it appears there was

à With consent of the offended party, offended spouse,
a mistake in charging proper offense, court shall dismiss
grandparents, guardian, or state asparens patriae, in that
original info upon the filing of a corrected one, provided
order
that the accused will not be placed in double jeopardy

à Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the (substitution)

prosecution of the case independently of parents,

à Fiscal determines direction of prosecution; complainant
grandparents or guardian, unless she is
must ask fiscal if he wants to dismiss the case; the motion
incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority.
to dismiss must be addressed to the court which has

à If offended party who is a minor fails to file the discretion over the disposition of the case (Republic vs.

complaint, her parents, grandparents or guardian may do Sunga)

so.
à Objection to the amendment of an information or

à In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is a complaint must be raised at the time the amendment is

jurisdictional requirement–retraction renders the made; otherwise, deemed to have consented thereto.

information void (People vs. Ocapan)

15. Remedies

à If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal

a. Motion to quash
may sign the complaint on his own

à May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the

c. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in [a]
grounds provided by the rules (generally, a flaw in the info)
or [b])

à If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial

à Complainant must be offended party
through a motion to quash info, the right to question it is
waived (People vs. Ocapan)
b. Motion to dismiss
à May be filed after plea but before judgment on most
of grounds for motion to quash
16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)
à Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct offenses
in one and the same information/complaint
à Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent to
a waiver
à Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single
punishment (complex crimes)
Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action
1. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil action
independent of the criminal proceeding to recover damages
from the offender.
à Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages
against public officers who impair the Constitutional rights
of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver)
à Even if the private prosecutor participates in the
prosecution, if he is not given the chance to prove
damages, the offended party is not barred from filing a
separate civil action
2. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly
instituted, EXCEPT
1. Waiver
2. Reservation of right to institute separate action
3. Institution of civil action prior to criminal action
à NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions for
violations of BP Blg. 22 shall be deemed to necessarily
include the corresponding civil action, and no reservation
to file such civil action separately shall be allowed or
recognized.
à San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA – past pronouncements of the
SC that the requirement in Rule 111 that a reservation be
made prior to the institution of an independent civil action
is an “unauthorized amendment” to substantive law is now
no longer controlling. Far from altering substantive rights,
the primary purpose of the reservation requirement is to
avoid multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays, to clear
congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial court,
and in short, the attainment of justice with the least
expense and vexation to parties-litigants.
3. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed,
EXCEPT
1. Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176
of NCC)
2. Prejudicial civil action
3. Civil case consolidated with criminal action
4. Civil action not one intended to enforce civil
liability arising from the offense (e.g., action for
legal separation against a spouse who committed
concubinage)
4. Prejudicial question arises when
1. The civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the
criminal action
2. The resolution of such issue will determine
whether the criminal action will proceed or not
à Requisites for a prejudicial question:
1. The civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the
criminal action: and
2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or
not the criminal action may proceed
à Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed at
any time before prosecution rests.
5. Remedies
a. Reservation of right to institute separate civil
proceedings to recover civil liability arising from crime
à Must be made before prosecution presents evidence
à Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal
action
b. Petition to suspend the criminal action
à May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question in a
pending civil action
à Filed at any time before the prosecution rests
6. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it
extinction of the civil unless the extinction proceeds from a
declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which
the civil might arise did not exist.
à Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil
liability not a bar to criminal action
7. Filing fees:
1. Actual or compensatory damages – filing fees not
required
2. Moral, temperate and exemplary – filing fees
required
1. If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party
upon filing of complaint or information
1. If not alleged, filing fees considered a first
lien on the judgment
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation
1. Preliminary investigation – inquiry or proceeding to
determine if there is sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC has been
committed, and that the respondent is probably guilty
thereof, and should be held for trial
à A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an
information to be filed with the RTC; complaints may be
filed with the MTC without need of an information, which is
merely recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)
à Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a ground
for a motion to quash the information; an information filed
without a preliminary investigation is defective but not
fatal; in its absence, the accused may ask for one; it is the
fiscal’s refusal to conduct a preliminary investigation when
the accused demands one which is a violation of the rights
of the accused (Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should
not dismiss the info, but hold the case in abeyance and
either: (1) conduct its own investigation; or (2) require the
fiscal to hold a reinvestigation.
2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary
investigation before filing an information with the
RTC, EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested
without a warrant and an inquest is conducted.
3. Right to Preliminary Investigation
à A personal right and may be waived
à Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at least
at the time of the plea
4. Who conducts Preliminary Investigation
1. Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants
2. Judges of MTC and MCTC
3. National and regional state prosecutors
4. Such other officers as may be authorized by law
5. Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1. The Ombudsman
2. The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth
5. Procedure
a. If conducted prior to arrest
i. Complainant files complaint with
(a) Provincial or city fiscal
(b) Regional or state prosecutor
(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro
Manila or chartered cities
(d) Other offices authorized by law
1. Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or
asks by subpoena complainant and respondent to
submit affidavits and counter-affidavits
1. If the investigating officer finds prima
facie evidence, he prepares an information
à Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge
vii. Records will not form records of the case proper
à Court on its own or on motion may order production of
record
b. If conducted after warrantless arrest
1. If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a

and a resolution preliminary investigation, with the assistance of

counsel, then the procedure for one prior to arrest
à i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a
is followed
crime has been committed and accused is probably guilty
1. Inquest conducted as follows
thereof
à Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing
(a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest
alone, unexplained and uncontradicted, would be enough
to merit a conviction of the accused (b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence
based on the statements of the complainant, arresting
iv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the
officer and witnesses
complaint

(c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the

à If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he finds
immediate release of the accused, OR prepares and files an
that probable cause exists and that there is a need to place
information
the accused under custody, then he may issue a warrant of
arrest à While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or not
to file an information, once it is filed with the court, the
à Flores vs. Sumaling – What differentiates the present
court acquires jurisdiction giving it discretion over the
rule from the previous one is that while before, it was
disposition of the case and the Sec. of Justice should
mandatory for the investigating judge to issue a warrant for
refrain from entertaining petitions for review or appeals
the arrest of the accused if he found probable cause, the
from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez vs.
rule now is that the investigating judge’s power to order
Undersecretary of Justice)
the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in which
NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party, peace
there is a necessity for placing him in custody “in order not
officer or fiscal without preliminary investigation.
to frustrate the ends of justice.” It is therefore error for
the investigating judge to order the issuance of a warrant 6. Remedies
of arrest solely on his finding of probable cause, without
making any finding of a necessity to place the accused in a. Motion for preliminary investigation

immediate custody to prevent a frustration of justice.

à Filed when accused is arrested without warrant
1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city
fiscal or chief state prosecutor
à Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving Art.
1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either
125, RPC
dismisses the complaint or files the
information in court
b. Motion for preliminary investigation
à Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information
against him has been filed without a preliminary
investigation
c. Motion for re-investigation
d. Appeal to DOJ
à Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary
investigation, on the ground that his rights to due process
of law were violated, ousting the court of jurisdiction
à Not all persons detained are arrested; only those
detained to answer for an offense.
à “Invitations” are not arrests and are usually not
unconstitutional, but in some cases may be taken as
commands (Babst vs. NBI); however, the practice of issuing
an “invitation” to a person who is investigated in
connection with an offense he is suspected to have
committed is considered as placing him under “custodial
investigation.” (RA 7438)
à Warrants of arrest remain valid until arrest is effected, or
the warrant is lifted

e. Petition for prohibition

à Arrest may be made at any time of the day or night

à Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal

3. Warrantless arrests by a peace officer or a private
proceedings
person

à Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in

a. When person to be arrested is committing, attempting
certain cases
or has committed an offense

à When prohibition proper to restrain criminal

b. When an offense has just been committed and the
proceedings:
person making the arrest has personal knowledge that the

1. When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive person to be arrested committed it

purposes (Salonga vs. Cruz-Pano)

à Warrantless arrest anytime for a continuing offense like
2. When the accused is deprived of his rights
3. When the statute on which the charge is based is rebellion, subversion (Umil vs. Ramos)

null and void à The continuing crime, not the crime finally charged,

4. When it will aid the administration of justice needs only be the cause of the arrest (Umil vs. Ramos)

(Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan)

5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided c. When person to be arrested is an escaped detainee

(Guingona vs. City Fiscal) (either serving sentence or with case pending)

Rule 113 Arrest

1. When a person lawfully arrested escapes
1. Arrest – taking a person into custody in order that he
2. Bondsman, for purpose of surrendering the accused
may be bound to answer for the commission of some
3. Accused attempts to leave country without court
offense, made by an actual restraint of the person or by his
permission
submission to custody

4. Procedure
2. General Rule: No person may be arrested without a
warrant. a. With warrant
 1. Complainant files application with affidavits (7) Person who escapes after arrest may be immediately
attached pursued
2. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination
to determine probable cause vi. Person arrested is brought to nearest police station
or jail
à In determining probable cause, judge must:

b. Without warrant:
(1) Personally examine witness
1. Person is arrested
(2) Witness must be under oath 1. Person arrested may waive right to Art.
125, RPC and ask for preliminary
(3) Examination must be reduced to writing (Luna vs. investigation or inquest
Plaza) à Fiscal is not judicial authority contemplated under Art.
à In determining probable cause, the judge may rely on 125 (Sayo vs. Chief of Police)
findings by responsible officer (Lim vs. Felix) 1. Fiscal files info

iii. Judge issues warrant of arrest 5. Requisites for a warrant of arrest:

à If without preliminary examination, considered irregular 1. Probable cause

(Bagcal vs. Villaraza) 2. Signed by judge
3. Specifically naming or particularly and sufficiently
iv. If peace officer is unable to serve warrant 10 days after describing person to be arrested
issuance, he must file a report and explanation with judge à John Doe warrants are void for being general warrants
within 10 days (Pangandaman vs. Cesar)

v. If warrant served 6. Remedies

(1) Person informed that he is being arrested a. Petition for writ of habeas corpus

(2) Informed of cause of his arrest
(3) Officer may break door or window if admission to
building is refused
(4) Person physically restrained
à For private citizens making an arrest
à Filed with any court, to effect immediate release of the
person detained
à Filed when a person is being illegally detained (without
judicial process), or was illegally arrested (void warrant or
unlawful warrantless arrest, or warrantless arrest beyond
period with no information filed)

à Habeas corpus is not allowed when:

à May not do so except to do some service to humanity or
1. The person is in custody of an officer under process
justice
of law, and
2. The court had jurisdiction to issue the process
(5) No violence or unnecessary force may be used
(Luna vs. Plaza)

(6) Officer may summon assistance

à If an arrest is improper, the remedy is a motion for 2. Revert to exclusionary rule: any

quashal of the warrant of arrest and/or a motion to quash involuntary confession is inadmissible

the information, not habeas corpus (Ilagan vs. Enrile) 1. Miranda rule: the accused must
be informed of his rights
à Habeas corpus is no longer available after an information
1. To remain silent
has been filed, the information being the judicial process
2. Against self-incrimination
required by law (Ilagan vs. Enrile)
3. To counsel
à Habeas corpus is proper when a person is being
4. Definition of custodial
restrained illegally, e.g., imprisoned past maximum penalty
investigation questioned
allowed by law (Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons)
1. It begins only
after arrest
b. Quashal of warrant of arrest
2. Police
investigations
à Filed with court which issued the warrant of arrest when
prior to arrest are
the warrant of arrest is fatally flawed
not covered
3. The rights may be
c. Motion to quash information
waived, but the
rights to be
à Filed with court when information against the person
informed of these
arrested has been filed
rights,i.e., to
warning, may not
à Must be made in a “special appearance” before the court
be waived
questioning only its lack of jurisdiction over the person of
4. Warning must not
the accused
only be said,
officer must make
à Otherwise, the voluntary appearance of the person
sure the person
arrested by filing a motion before the court would be
arrested
deemed a submission to the authority of the court, thus
understands them
granting it whatever jurisdiction it lacked over the person
specifically
5. Present rules
à Any irregularity in the arrest is cured when the
1. Voluntary
petitioner submits himself to the jurisdiction of the
confessio
court, e.g., by filing for bail (Bagcal vs. Villaraza)
ns are
7. V.V. Mendoza, “Rights to Counsel in Custodial
admissibl
Investigation” e
2. Test of
à Evolution of rights of the accused under custodial
voluntari
investigation ness
determin
1. All involuntary confession were inadmissible;
ed on a
accused had to prove involuntariness
case-to-
1. Involuntary confessions were inadmissible
case basis
only if they were false
3. Waiver of
rights
 must not à Bail should be available regardless of other
only be circumstances or the merits of the case, if the health or
with the life of the detainee is in danger (Dela Rama vs.
counsel
People’s Court)
but must
à Excessive bail is tantamount to denial of bail, which is
be in
unconstitutional (Dela Camara vs. Enage)
writing
à Confessions made without assistance of counsel are 3. When bail is a matter of right
inadmissible as evidence to incriminate the accused, but
they may be used to impeach the credibility of the à Before or after conviction by MTC, MCTC, MJC
accused, or they may be treated as verbal admission of the
accused through the testimony of the witnesses (People vs. à Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not

Molas) punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life

Rule 114 Bail imprisonment

1. Bail – security given for the release of a person in

4. When bail is discretionary (application filed with court
custody of law, furnished by him or a bondsman,
where case is pending)
conditioned upon his appearance before any court as
required under the following conditions: 1. Upon conviction by RTC of an offense not
1. Undertaking effective upon approval and remains punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
in force at all stages until promulgation of imprisonment
judgment, unless sooner cancelled 2. Provisional liberty under same circs. but during
2. Accused shall appear before court when required period to appeal subject to consent of bondsman
3. Failure to appear despite notice to him or the 3. In case he has applied for probation after final
bondsman will waive his right to be present and judgment, he may be allowed temporary liberty
trial shall proceed in absentia under his bail or recognizance
4. Bondsman shall surrender accused for execution of
judgment 5. Procedure
à Bail applies to all persons detained, not just to those
charged with the offense (Herras vs. Teehankee) a. Offense charged is not capital:

à Court has power to prohibit person out on bail from

i. Accused applies for bail
leaving the country (Manotoc, Jr. vs. CA)
à Bail implies delivery of the accused to the sureties who,
(1) Where information against him was filed or where case
though not holding him prisoner, may seize him and
is pending
imprison him until they can deliver him to court (US vs.
Bonoan) (2) Absent (1), in another branch of the same court within
2. General Rule: All persons are entitled to bail as a the province or city where he is held
matter of right, except those charged with capital
offenses. (3) If arrested in another province, city or municipality,

à Right to bail traditionally unavailable to military file with the RTC

personnel facing court martial, who are not in the same

(4) Absent (3), with the MTC
class as civilians (Comendador vs. de Villa)
 1. Judge sets bail 2. Does not require signature of accused for trial
1. Accused may move to reduce bail, and 3. Does not require signature of accused to be valid
hearing will be set 8. Prosecution witnesses may be required to post bail to
2. Accused posts bail and deposits the same ensure their appearance at the trial,except:
with the Municipal/City/Provincial 1. Substitution of info (see R110, §14)
Treasurer or, if cash, with the Collector of 2. Court believes that material witness may not
Internal Revenue appear at the trial
3. Accused is released
9. When bail required under RA 6036 (violation of
b. Offense charged is capital: ordinance, light felony, criminal offense – not higher that 6
month imprisonment and/or P2000 fine, or both)
1. Accused petitions for bail
2. Judge sets hearing to determine whether evidence
1. a. Caught in flagrante
of guilt is strong
2. Confessed to commission of offense unless
à Ex-parte hearing on bail is arbitrary and unacceptable repudiated (force and intimidation)
(Herras vs. Teehankee) 3. Previously escaped, evaded sentence or jumped
1. Prosecution presents evidence bail
1. Court may not force fiscal to produce 4. Violation of Sec. 2 (fails to report to clerk of court
evidence (Herras vs. Teehankee) periodically under his recognizance)
2. If evidence is strong, bail is denied 5. Recidivist, habitual delinquent previously
1. Otherwise, judge sets bail and convicted for an offense to which the law or
procedure for non-capital offense ordinance attaches an equal or greater penalty or
is followed for 2 or more offenses to which it attaches a
à In capital crimes, judge’s discretion is limited to lighter penalty
determining strength of evidence and does not cover 6. Committed offense while on parole or under
determining whether bail should be allowed (Herras vs. conditional pardon

Teehankee) 7. Previously pardoned by municipal or city mayor for

à Evidence must be strong that the accused is guilty of the violation of ordinance for at least 2 times

capital offense charged, not just of any offense (Bernardez

10. Instances when accused may be released on
vs. Valera)
recognizance:
6. Bail bond – an obligation under seal given by accused
with one or more sureties and made payable to proper 1. Offense charged is a violation of an ordinance, a
officer with the condition to be void upon performance by light felony or criminal offense the imposable
the accused of such acts as he may legally be required to penalty to which does not exceed 6 months and or
perform P2000 fine
2. Person has been in custody for a period equal to or
7. Recognizance more than the minimum of the imposable principal
penalty, without application of the Indeterminate
1. Obligation of record entered into before some
Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance
court of magistrate duly authorized to take it, with
3. Accused has applied for probation and before the
the condition to do some particular act, the most
same has been resolved, but NO BAIL was filed or
usual condition in criminal cases being the
accused is incapable of filing one
appearance of the accused for trial
 4. Youthful offender held for physical and mental à Sureties guarantee only appearance of the accused, not
examination, trial or appeal, if unable to furnish his conduct (US vs. Bonoan)
bail à Sureties exonerated if appearance made impossible by
an act of God, the obligee or the law (US vs. Bonoan)
11. Cancellation of bail

14. Provisional forfeiture

a. Upon application with the court and due notice to the
fiscal 1. Within 30 days, produce the body or give reason
for non-production AND
1. Accused surrenders back to custody
2. Explain satisfactorily the absence of the accused
1. Accused dies
when first required to appear

b. Automatic cancellation
15. Remedies

1. Case is dismissed
1. Application for bail, when bail can be availed of as
1. Accused is acquitted
a matter of right
2. Accused is convicted and surrenders for
2. Petition for bail, when the offense charged is a
execution of judgment
capital offense

12. When bail cancelled or denied: after RTC imposes

à For judge to set hearing for the determination of
imprisonment exceeding 6 years, but not more than 20
strength of evidence of guilt
years, and:

16. Circumstances to be considered in fixing amount of

1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, habitual
bail:
delinquent or guilty of the aggravating
circumstance of reiteration; 1. Financial ability of accused to give bail;
2. Provisionally escaped, evaded sentence, violated 2. Nature and circumstances of offense;
provisions of bail; 3. Penalty of offense charged;
3. Committed offense while on probation, parole, or 4. Character and reputation of accused;
conditional pardon; 5. Age and health of accused
4. Probability of flight; or 6. Weight of evidence against accused
5. Undue risk that during appeal, he may commit 7. Probability of accused appearing for trial;
another crime 8. Forfeiture of other bonds;
9. Fact that accused was a fugitive from justice when
13. When bail is forfeited
arrested; and
10. Pendency of other cases in which the accused is
a. Accused fails to appear before court when required
under bond

à 30 days for bondsman to show cause why judgment

17. Notes:
should not be rendered against him

1. Posting bail waives the right to question any

b. Bondsman fails to produce him within 30 days
irregularity attending the arrest of a person
(Callanta vs. Villanueva). However, this does not
c. Bondsman fails to satisfactorily explain to the court why
result in waiver of the inadmissibility of the
accused did not appear when first required to do so
articles seized incidentally to such illegal arrest.
 2. Accused waived the right to question any
irregularity in the conduct of the preliminary
investigation when he failed to do so before
entering his plea (People vs. Dela Cerna)
3. Accused out on bail may be re-arrested if he
attempts to depart from the Philippines without
prior court permission (warrantless arrest allowed).
Rule 115 Rights of Accused
1. Right of the accused under the Rules
a. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond
reasonable doubt
à In an appeal from a conviction, the accused shall again
be presumed innocent until and unless his conviction is
affirmed (Castillo vs. Felix)
b. To be informed of the nature and cause of charges
à The right must be substantially complied with;
arraignment and later proceedings must be in a language
the accused understands (People vs. Crisologo)
c. To be present at every stage of proceedings, subject to
waiver by bail
à If an accused escapes, he waives this right and merits a
trial in absentia; the accused forfeits his rights to be
notified of proceedings in the future and to adduce
evidence in his behalf (People vs. Salas)
1. To testify as witness on his own behalf, subject to
cross-examination on matters covered by direct
examination; not to be prejudiced by his silence
2. Not to be compelled to be a witness against
himself
3. To confront and examine the witnesses against
him, including the right to use in evidence
testimony of a witness
4. Who is deceased, out of or cannot with due
diligence be found in the RP
1. Given in another proceeding
2. With the same parties
3. Same subject matter
4. Opportunity to cross-examine
à Prosecution has no privilege to withhold the identity of
informers when such informer was crucial in the operation
itself; failure to present the informer is a denial of the
right to confront the witness which merits the reversal of
the conviction (People vs. Bagano)
g. To have compulsory process to secure witnesses and
evidence in his behalf
h. To have a speedy, impartial and public trial
à Unreasonable postponements of trial amounts to a denial
of the right to a speedy trial, entitling the accused to
mandamus to compel dismissal of the case, or to habeas
corpus if he is detained
i. To have the right of appeal
2. Rights of the accused under the Constitution
a. To due process
b. Against self-incrimination
à Right is limited to testimonies; ocular inspection of the
body may be allowed (Villaflor vs. Summers)
à Being informed of rights means a meaningful
transmission of information, without which confession
made by the accused is inadmissible (People vs. Nicandro)
à Confessions obtained through coercion are inadmissible
(People vs. Opida)
à Right against self-incrimination and to counsel do not
apply during custodial investigation (People vs. Ayson)
à During trial, the right against self-incrimination takes the
following form:
1. Accused may refuse to testify
2. If he testifies, he may refuse to answer those
questions which may incriminate him in ANOTHER
offense
c. Against double jeopardy
d. To be heard by himself and counsel
3. Double jeopardy
1. First jeopardy must have attached prior to the first
2. First jeopardy attached and terminated
3. Valid complaint or information
1. Competent court with jurisdiction
2. Accused had pleaded
3. Action ended in conviction, acquittal or
termination without the consent of the
accused
c. Offense charged in later case is:
1. Same as that in previous case
1. Necessarily includes or is included in the
previous case
2. An attempt or frustration of the offense in
previous case
1. An offense lesser than that
charged to which the accused
pleaded guilty with the consent of
the fiscal and the offended party
4. Exceptions to double jeopardy
1. The offense was made graver by supervening
events
2. The facts constituting the graver offense were only
discovered after the filing of the earlier
information
à No double jeopardy if the new fact which justified the
new charge arose only after arraignment and conviction
(People vs. City Court)
à No double jeopardy where the trial was a sham since
there was no competent court (Galman vs. Sandiganbayan)
à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with
consent of the accused (Caes vs. IAC)
à There is double jeopardy if a person is charged twice
under different penal statutes for the same acts (People vs.
Relova)
c. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense without the consent of
the fiscal and the offended party
5. Remedies
1. Motion to quash
2. Motion to dismiss
à Both filed on the ground of violation of accused’s rights,
thereby ousting the court of jurisdiction
6. NOTES:
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 1
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property
without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied
the equal protection of the laws.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 14
1. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal
offense without due process of law.
2. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved,
and shall enjoy the right to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusations against him, to
have a speedy, impartial and public trial, to meet
the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory
process to secure the attendance of witnesses and
the production of evidence in his behalf.
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that
he has been duly notified and that his failure to appear is
unjustifiable.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 16
All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of
their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 17
No person shall be compelled to be a witness against new trial. Further, such right may be waived, expressly or
himself. impliedly.

à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 21 à NOTE, HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98 (implementing
“Speedy Trial Act of 1997”), accused must be given at least
No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for 15 days to prepare for trial, which shall commence within
the same offense. 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order.

If an act is punished by a law or ordinance, conviction or j. Case proceeds to pre-trial, trial or hearing, depending
acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to another on the plea
prosecution for the same act.
à Statement in the judgment that the accused was
Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea arraigned and pleaded is sufficient; the manner of
statement of such fact is immaterial (People vs. Cariaga)
1. Procedure

2. Kinds of plea
1. Court informs accused of his right to counsel and
asks him if he wants one
1. No plea – a plea of not guilty shall be entered
2. Court appoints counsel de oficio if accused has
2. Conditional plea of guilt – a plea of not guilty shall
none
be entered
3. Not guilty – case proceeds to trial or pre-trial
à If no such member of the available, any person who is a
4. Guilty to a lesser offense – if fiscal and offended
resident of the province, of good repute for probity and
party consents, conviction under offense charged
ability to defend accused
for purposes of double jeopardy
5. Info may be amended
c. Court gives counsel time to confer with accused at
1. Case goes to trial
least an hour before arraignment
2. Even if info is not amended, and even if
lesser offense is not included in offense
à Period allowed for counsel de oficio to confer with
charged, court may still find the accused
accused must be substantially complied with; if not, case
guilty of that lesser offense
may be remanded for re-arraignment (People vs. Gonzaga)
1. Accused given a copy of the information, which is e. Guilty to a capital offense
read to him in a language he understands
2. Accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or not à Court conducts searching inquiry to determine if accused
guilty was aware of the charges, of his plea, and its consequences
3. Accused files a motion to quash or makes plea
4. Accused personally makes his plea à Court requires prosecution to present evidence to prove
5. Plea is entered into record guilt of accused and determine his degree of culpability,
6. If accused makes plea of not guilty, counsel has at and accused may still establish presence of mitigating
least 2 days to prepare for trial circumstances in his favor
à People vs. Agbayani – the right for 2 days to prepare must
be expressly demanded. Only when so demanded does f. Guilty to a non-capital offense
denial thereof constitute reversible error and ground for
à Court receives evidence from the parties to determine
penalty to impose
à Plea of guilty not necessarily followed by
conviction. Upon receipt of exculpatory evidence (if
accused pleaded guilty), trial court should consider the
c. Motion to suspend arraignment
à Filed when the accused seems mentally unsound or if
there is a prejudicial question in a pending civil case
d. Motion to withdraw an improvident plea of guilt

plea withdrawn and in its place, order the plea of not

à May be filed at any time before judgment of conviction
guilty
becomes final, when it can be shown that the accused was

à Plea of guilty waives only defects which may be taken not aware of the significance of pleading guilty to the

advantage of by motion to quash or by plea in abatement; charges

cannot cure jurisdictional defects.

Rule 117 Motion to Quash

3. Effects 1. Motion to quash – a hypothetical admission that even

if all the facts alleged were true, the accused still cannot
a. Entry of plea will waive be convicted due to other reasons

1. Right to question illegality of the arrest 2. When to file Motion to Quash

2. Right to question any irregularity in the preliminary
investigation General Rule: Before entering plea; all grounds not raised
3. Right to file a motion to quash deemed waived

b. Improvident plea of guilty may be changed to not guilty Exception: The following grounds may be used in MTQ even
any time before judgment is rendered after plea
1. No offense charged
c. A plea of not guilty may not be changed to guilty, as 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged
doing so would only spare the prosecution of presenting 3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty
evidence and still result in the conviction of the accused. 4. Double jeopardy

4. Remedies 3. Grounds

a. Motion for specification a. Information does not conform to prescribed form

à May be filed any time before plea, even after a MTQ à For the info to charge a complex crime, it is not
necessary that it be defined by law, only that it alleges
à Filed when the information is insufficient in form or is that one offense was necessary to commit the other
generally worded, that a Bill of Particulars is necessary to (People vs. Alagao)
clarify the acts for which the accused is being charged
b. Court has no jurisdiction
b. Motion to quash
1. No territorial jurisdiction
à May be filed at anytime before plea is entered 2. No
jurisdiction over offense charged may be raised
à Based on grounds provided by the rules
 at any time; no waiver considered even upon
failure to move to quash on such ground
3. No jurisdiction over person of the accused
à The court gained jurisdiction over the person of the
accused when he voluntarily appeared for the pre-
suspension hearing (Layosa vs. Rodriguez)
c. Accused would be put in double jeopardy
à Bars another prosecution
à No waiver
à No double jeopardy if first case was dismissed with the
consent of the accused (Que vs. Cosico), unless ground for
dismissal is: (a) denial of right to speedy trial; or (b)
insufficiency of evidence.
à If the first case was dismissed due to a deficient
information, then there was no valid information and there
could be no double jeopardy (Caniza vs. People)
à Cudia vs CA – it should be the Provincial Prosecutor of
Pampanga, not the City Prosecutor, who should prepare
informations for offenses committed within Pampanga but
outside Angeles City. An information must be prepared and
presented by the prosecuting attorney or someone
authorized by law. If not, the court does not acquire
jurisdiction. Although failure to file a motion to quash the
information is a waiver of all objections to it insofar as
formal objections to pleadings are concerned, questions
relating to want of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage
of the proceedings. Moreover, since the complaint or
information was insufficient because it was so defective in
form or substance that conviction upon it could not have
been sustained, its dismissal without the consent of the
accused cannot be pleaded as prior jeopardy, and will not
be a bar to a second prosecution.
d. More than one offense was charged, EXCEPT where law
prescribes single punishment for various offenses
e. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense
à May be raised at any time
à No waiver
à For charge to be complete, it is necessary to state that it
was exempted from any amnesty existing at the time
f. Criminal action or liability has been extinguished
g. Information contains allegations which, if true, would
be a legal excuse or justification
h. Officer who filed the information had no authority
à Presentation of evidence cannot cure an invalid
information (People vs. Asuncion)
NOTE: Court will consider no other grounds other than
those raised, EXCEPT lack of jurisdiction over offense
charged.
4. Requisites of Double jeopardy
a. Valid information or complaint, sufficient in form and
substance
b. Before court of competent jurisdiction
à Doctrine of “Jurisdiction by Estoppel”: depends upon
whether the lower court actually had jurisdiction or not. If
it had no jurisdiction, but the case was tried and decided
upon the theory that it had jurisdiction, the parties are not
barred on appeal, from assailing such jurisdiction, for the
same ‘must exist as a matter of law, and may not be
conferred by consent of the parties or by
estoppel’. However, if the lower court had jurisdiction,
and the case was heard and decided upon a given theory,
such, for instance, as that the court had no jurisdiction,
the party who induced it to adopt such theory will not be
permitted, on appeal, to assume an inconsistent position —
that the lower court had jurisdiction. Here, the principle of
estoppel applies. The rule that jurisdiction is conferred by
law, and does not depend upon the will of the parties, has
no bearing thereon.
c. Accused had pleaded
d. Conviction, acquittal, or dismissal or termination of approval. It usually involves the defendant’s pleading
case without consent of accused guilty to a lesser offense or to only some of the counts of a
multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence than
e. Bar to offense charged, attempt to commit the same or that for the greater charge.
necessarily includes or is necessarily included
à Under “Speedy Trial Act of 1997”, in all criminal cases
à Conviction for physical injuries through reckless cognizable by the MTC, MCTC, MeTC, RTC and
imprudence constitutes double jeopardy to the charge of Sandiganbayan, pretrial is mandatory.
damage to property through reckless imprudence.
à Under SC Circular 38-98, implementing the “Speedy Trial
5. Procedure Act of 1997”, an accused may plea guilty to a lesser offense
only if said offense is necessarily included in the offense
1. MTQ filed
charged.
2. If based on defect in info which can be cured,
court shall order its amendment
2. Stipulation of facts
3. Quashing the info shall NOT be a bar to subsequent
prosecution (accused has not pleaded yet), EXCEPT
à Facts which both parties and respective counsels agree
when the ground is:
on as evidenced by their signatures; these facts need not
1. Double jeopardy OR
be proved by evidence in trial
2. Extinction of criminal liability

à Stipulation is inadmissible if unsigned by either accused

6. Remedies
or counsel; a later memo of confirmation, signed only by

1. Motion to dismiss – if certain grounds were not counsel, cannot cure defect (Fule vs. CA)

raised or denied in a MTQ

2. Trial 3. Pre-trial order – binds the parties, limits the trial to
matters not yet disposed of, and controls the course of
à If there was really no basis for the info, then such could action during the trial
be proved in the trial
4. Procedure
à Upon denial of a MTQ, the proper remedy is to go on
1. Judge must calendar pre-trial
trial and later to appeal, if necessary; mandamus
2. Either party may waive the pre-trial
or certiorari will only be granted if there is not other plain,
3. If court appoints counsel de oficio, counsel has at
simple and adequate remedy
least 2 days to prepare
7. Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground
4. In the pre-trial conference
therefor deemed a waiver of such grounds, except:
5. Plea bargaining
1. Failure to charge an offense
6. Stipulation of facts
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged
7. Marking of evidence (does not imply conceding to
3. Extinction of the offense or of the penalty
its admissibility or credibility)
4. Double jeopardy
8. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
Rule 118 Pre-Trial
9. Other matters which will promote a fair and
1. Plea bargaining – process whereby the accused and the expeditious trial
prosecution in a criminal case work out a mutually
satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court e. Judge issues pre-trial order
Rule 119 Trial 3. Defense may, with or without leave of court, file a
demurrer to evidence
1. In trial, the defense tries 4. Defense presents evidence
5. Defense rests
1. To assail the admissibility of evidence which prove 6. Prosecution presents rebuttal evidence
the elements of the offense charged 7. Defense presents rebuttal evidence
2. To assail the credibility of such evidence 8. Trial is closed; case is submitted for judgment
3. To prove another version, possibly admitting
certain evidence of the prosecution and adding 3. When mistake made in charging proper offense
other evidence to cast reasonable doubt
à Even in summary procedure, the judge cannot base his 1. If Accused cannot be convicted of offense charged

decision simply on affidavits; he must give the defendant or offense necessarily included therein
2. Accused detained, not discharged
the chance to cross-examine (Combate vs. San Jose)
3. Original case dismissed upon filing of proper

2. Procedure
a. Parties notified of date of trial 2 days before trial date
(R119, §1)
à HOWEVER, under SC Circular 38-98, accused must be
given at least 15 days to prepare for trial, which shall
commence within 30 days from receipt of Pre-Trial Order.
information
à Example: Charged with theft. At trial, appears that
offense is estafa. The prosecution can ask for the dismissal
of the info in order to file a new one for estafa. No Double
Jeopardy because no valid info in the first case.
4. Application for examination of witnesses for accused
before trial

1. Accused may move that his witnesses be examined 1. Sick or infirm; unable to attend trial
2. Defense witnesses examined by any judge or 2. Resides more than 100 km. from means of trial; no
lawyer means to attend
3. Prosecution witnesses, if they would be unable to
attend trial, may be examined by the judge 5. Application (prosecution)
handling the case
4. Trial continues from day to day, unless postponed 1. Sick or infirm

for a just cause 2. Has to leave the RP with indefinite date of

5. Prosecution presents evidence returning

à Presentation 6. Requisites for postponement due to absence of a

witness
à Testimonies: direct examination
1. Witness is really material and appears to the court

à Cross-examination to be so
2. Party who applies for postponement has not been
à Re-cross guilty of neglect
3. Witness can be had at the time to which the trial
à Offer has been deferred
4. No similar evidence could be obtained
1. Accused may move for discharge
2. Prosecution rests 7. Requisites to discharge of an accused as State Witness
 1. Testimony of accused absolutely needed
2. No other direct evidence available EXCEPT his
testimony
3. Testimony can be corroborated on material points
4. Accused does not appear to be most guilty
5. Accused has never been convicted of offense
involving moral turpitude
à Discharge of accused, when not all the requisites were
met, cannot be revoked as long as he testified according to
what was expected of him (People vs. Aninon)
8. Remedies
a. Motion for separate trials
à Filed by the fiscal to try several accused separately
à Granted at the court’s discretion
à May also be ordered by the court motu proprio
b. Motion to consolidate
à Upon the court’s discretion, separate charges may be
tried in one single case if the offenses charged arise form
the same facts or form part of a series of similar offenses
à Court allowed consolidation of rape cases substantially
committed in the same manner (People vs. David)
c. Motion for continuance – filed to postpone trial for just
cause
d. Motion to exclude public
à Excluding parties, counsels and court personnel
à May also be ordered by court motu proprio
e. Motion for discharge
à Filed before the prosecution rests
à Hearing to determine existence of requisites for
discharge
à Prosecution will present evidence and the sworn
statement of the proposed state witness
à Evidence adduced in this said hearing automatically form
part of trial; however, if court denies motion for discharge,
his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence.
à Discharge of the accused has the effect of acquittal,
unless accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-
accused in accordance with his statement (which formed
the basis for his discharge)
f. Demurrer to evidence
à May be made after the prosecution rests its case
à If the court finds the prosecution’s evidence insufficient,
the case will be dismissed
à Otherwise, if demurrer denied
1. If the demurrer was made with leave of court,
defense gets to present evidence
2. If the demurrer was made without leave of court,
defense is deemed to have waived the right to
present evidence and the case is submitted for
judgment
à Case may also be dismissed motu proprio
g. Motion to reopen
à Filed after the case is submitted for judgment but before
judgment is actually rendered
à To allow either side to present additional evidence, if
such could not be found before
à Granted on discretion of the judge
à The accused cannot move to reopen the case to allow
him to adduce evidence in his behalf when his failure to
adduce them during the trial was his own fault (People vs.
Cruz)
Rule 120 Judgment
1. Judgment – adjudication by the court that the accused c. If judgment is of conviction, remedy is to file:
is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged, and the
1. Motion for reconsideration
imposition of the proper penalty and civil liability provided
2. Motion for new trial
by law on the accused
3. Notice of appeal

2. General Rule: If the accused is found not guilty, he will

à Or else, judgment becomes final and is entered in the
be acquitted and the acquittal immediately becomes final
book of Judgments
and executory. If the accused is found guilty, penalty and
civil liability will be imposed on him.
6. When judgment in a criminal case becomes final:

3. Accused may be convicted of 1. After lapse of period for perfecting an appeal; or

2. When sentence partially or totally satisfied or
1. The offense charged
served; or
2. A lesser offense necessarily included in the offense
3. Accused has expressly waived in writing his right to
charged
appeal, EXCEPT in cases of automatic review
à Accused cannot be convicted for an offense graver than
where death penalty is imposed
that charged (People vs. Guevarra)
4. Accused has applied for probation

4. Contents
7. Only a judgment in conviction can be modified or set
aside
1. Written in official language
2. Personally prepared and signed by the judge
1. Before judgment had been final (otherwise double
3. Contains facts proved
jeopardy);
4. Contains law upon which judgment is based
2. Before appeal had been perfected; or
à In case of conviction, judgment must state:
3. To correct clerical errors in the judgment
1. Legal qualification of offense and aggravating and
mitigating circumstances 8. Remedies
2. Level of participation
3. Penalty imposed a. Appeal
4. Civil liability for damages, unless right to separate
civil action has been reserved à Filed within 15 days of promulgation of judgment
à In case of acquittal, judgment must state:
1. Civil liability for damages, unless acts alleged à Period is interrupted by filing of a motion for new trial or

clearly did not exist reconsideration

2. Basis of liability
à On motion of accused or at its own instance with consent

5. Procedure of the accused

1. Judge reads judgment in presence of accused b. Motion for reconsideration

2. If judgment is of acquittal
3. It becomes final and executory à Filed when there are errors of law or fact in the
4. It bars subsequent prosecution for the same judgment
offense
à Shall require no further proceedings
à Notice should be given to the fiscal 3. May be made at the instance of either party who
can thereafter present additional evidence
c. Motion for new trial
2. Motion for new trial
à Notice should be given to the fiscal
1. Filed after judgment is rendered but before the
à Filed on the following grounds: finality thereof
2. At the instance or with the consent of the accused
1. Error of law or irregularities have been made 3. The prosecution can move only for the
during trial which are prejudicial to the substantial reconsideration of the judgment but cannot
rights of the accused present additional evidence

ii. New evidence has been found which could not have been 3. Motion for New Trial is denied if:
found before and which could change the judgment
1. Only impeaching evidence is sought to be
9. Procedure for new trial introduced as the court had already passed upon
issue of credibility
1. Hearing shall be set and held 2. Only corroborative evidence is offered
2. All evidence not alleged to be in error shall stand 3. Prisoner admits commission of crime with which
3. New evidence will be introduced accused is charged (facility with which such
4. Old judgment may be set aside and a new one confession can be obtained and fabricated)
rendered 4. Alleged new evidence is inherently improbable and
10. Notes: could easily be concocted
à Suspension of sentence for youthful offenders – after 5. Alleged new evidence consists of recantations of
conviction, minor is committed to custody and care of prosecution witness, due to unreliability of such

DSWD or any training institution until reaches 21 years of recantations, EXCEPT if no other evidence to

age, or a shorter period sustain conviction aside from recanted testimony

à Probation – disposition under which a defendant after

4. New Trial vs. Reconsideration
conviction and sentences, is released subject to conditions
imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation
à Motion for recon is based on the grounds of errors of law
officer
in the judgment is court is not asked to reopen the case for
à Parole – the conditional release of an offender from a
further proceedings, but to reconsider its findings or
penal or correctional institution after he has served the
conclusions of law and make them conformable to the law
minimum period of his prison sentence under the continued
applicable to the case on the judgment the court has to
custody of the state and under conditions that permit his
render anew.
reincarceration if he violated the conditions of his release
Rule 121 New Trial or Reconsideration 5. New Trial vs. Modification of Judgment

1. Reopening of the case à In New Trial, irregularities are expunged from the record
and/or new evidence is introduced. In modification of
1. Made by the court before judgment is rendered in
judgment, no new hearings or proceedings of any kind or
the exercise of sound discretion
change in the record or evidence. A simple modification is
2. Does not require consent of accused
made on the basis of what is on the record.
6. New Trial vs. Reopening of the Case
à New trial presupposes that existence of a judgment to be
set aside upon the granting of a new trial
à In reopening, no judgment has yet been rendered,
although the hearing may have already been closed
7. Motion for Reconsideration
à Grounds are errors of law or fact in judgment, which
require no further proceedings.
8. Effects of Granting Motion for New Trial or
Reconsideration
a. Based on error of law or irregularities during trial:
à Proceedings and evidence not affected by irregularities
stand, and those affected are set aside. Court may allow
introduction of new evidence
b. Based on newly discovered evidence:
à Evidence already taken shall stand; new evidence taken
with the old
Rule 122 Appeal
1. Procedure
a. Filed with RTC, if original case was with MTC
à Notice served to lower court and to adverse party
b. Filed with the CA or SC, if original case was with RTC
i. With CA: notice of appeal with court, and with copy on
adverse party
à If CA is of opinion that penalty should be reclusion
perpetua or higher, it shall render judgment imposing said
penalty, but refrain from entering judgment and then
certify the case and the entire record thereof to the SC for
review (R124, §13)
à CA may reverse, affirm, or modify judgment of RTC, or
remand case for new trial or re-trial, or dismiss the case
à If RTC decided case in appellate jurisdiction: Petition
for Review
ii. With SC: notice of appeal where penalty imposed is
life imprisonment, or lesser penalty involving offenses
committed on the same occasion, or arising out of same
occurrence where graver penalty of death is available but
life imprisonment is imposed; all other cases, by petition
for review on certiorari
à If death penalty, automatic review
iii. Withdrawal of appeal
à May be made at any time before judgment on the appeal
is rendered
à Lower court judgment becomes final
à Case remanded for execution of judgment
à Once notice of appeal is filed, cannot be validly
withdrawn to give way for a Motion for Recon or a Motion
for New Trial, since the filing of the notice perfected the
appeal, and the trial court loses its power to modify or set
aside the judgment. The only valid withdrawal of an
appeal is where the accused decides to serve his sentence.
2. Effect of appeal by any of several accused
1. Shall not affect those who did not appeal, EXCEPT
if favorable and applicable to them
2. Civil appeal by offended party shall not affect
criminal aspect of judgment
3. Execution of judgment on appellant will be stayed
upon perfection of appeal
3. When appeal by prosecution from order of dismissal of à For a warrant to be valid, it must meet the requirements
criminal case will not result in double jeopardy set by law (Burgos vs. Chief of Staff)
à Tapping conversations is equivalent to a search and
1. Dismissal made upon motion or with express
seizure (US vs. Katz)
consent of the accused
2. Dismissal is not an acquittal nor based upon 2. General Rule: No search or seizure can be conducted
consideration of the evidence or merits of the case
unless it is authorized by a search warrant. Evidence
3. Question to be passed upon by the appellate court
gathered from an illegal search and seizure is inadmissible.
is purely legal so that if the dismissal is found
incorrect, the case has to be remanded to the à Warrantless searches are illegal, unreasonable and
court of origin to determine the guilt or innocence
unconstitutional (Alvarez vs. CFI)
of the accused
à It is not the police action which is impermissible, but the
4. When serving sentence, remedy is to petition for habeas
procedure and unreasonable character by which it is
corpus
exercised (Guazon vs. de Villa)
1. Filed when the law under which the accused was
à Court gains jurisdiction over items seized by a valid
convicted is repealed or declared unconstitutional
search warrant and returned to it, and such is not an
2. When a later judgment is rendered acquitting
unconstitutional deprivation of property (Villanueva vs.
others for similar circumstances
Querubin)

à Otherwise, equal protection is violated à Evidence from an illegal search may be used as evidence,
if no objection is raised (Stonehill vs. Diokno)
1. When penalty is lowered and convict has already
served more than the maximum period of the new à Right against unreasonable search and seizure may be
penalty waived, but for the waiver to be effective:
à Habeas corpus is available when a person is imprisoned
beyond the maximum penalty imposed by law (Gumabon 1. The right must exist
2. Person must be aware of the right
vs. Dir. of Prisons)
3. Person clearly shows the intent to relinquish such
NOTE: When dismissal is capricious, certiorari lies and no
right
double jeopardy since validity and not correctness of
à No waiver against unreasonable search and seizure when
dismissal is being challenged.
one compromises the criminal proceedings (Alvarez vs. CFI)
Rule 126 Search and Seizure
à There is no waiver of right when evidence of coercion is
1. Search warrant – an order in writing issued in the name
present (Roan vs. Gonzales)
of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge and
directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for
3. Requisites of a valid search warrant
personal property described therein and bring it before the
court a. Issued upon probable cause
à Cannot be issued to look for evidence (Uy Khetin vs.
Villareal) à Probable cause – such facts and circumstances which

à Seizing objects to be used as evidence is equivalent to would lead a reasonably prudent man to believe that a

forcing one to be a witness against himself (Uy Khetin vs. crime has been committed and the thing to be searched for

Villareal) and seized is in the place to be searched

b. Probable cause is personally determined by the issuing
judge
à Hence, signed by him
à By any RTC, to be served anywhere in the country, for an
offense which occurred anywhere in the country (Malaloan
vs. CA)
c. Issuing judge personally examined, in the form of
searching questions, the appellant and his witness and took
down their written depositions
d. Search warrant particularly describes or identifies the
property to be seized
à Property which men may lawfully possess may not be the
object of a search warrant (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
à Nature of goods may allow description to be general or
not too technical (Alvarez vs. CFI)
e. Particularly describes the place to be searched
f. It shall issue only for one specific offense
à Otherwise, cannot be said to have issued upon probable
cause (Asian Surety vs. Herrera)
à Absence of specific offense makes impossible
determination of probable cause (Stonehill vs. Diokno)
g. Was not issued for more than 10 days prior to a search
made pursuant thereto (search warrant becomes void after
10 days)
h. Indicates time, if to be served at night
4. When a search warrant may be said to particularly
describe the thing to be seized
1. Description is as specific as circumstances allow
2. Expresses a conclusion of fact by which the
warrant officer may be guided
3. Things described are limited to those which bear a
direct relation to the offense for which the
warrant is issued
5. Procedure
a. Complainant files application, attaches affidavits
à Oath requires that the person taking it personally knows
the facts of the case (People vs. Sy Juco)
à Affidavits submitted must state that the premises is
occupied by the person against whom the warrant is issued,
that the objects to be seized are fruits or means of
committing a crime, and that they belong to the same
person, thus, not affecting third persons (People vs. Sy
Juco)
à When complainant’s knowledge is hearsay, affidavits of
witnesses are necessary (Alvarez vs. CFI)
b. Judge conducts ex parte preliminary examination of
complainant and witnesses under oath to determine
probable cause
à Judge must ask probing questions, not just repeat facts
in the affidavit (Roan vs. Gonzales)
c. Judge issues search warrant good for 10 days
d. Peace officer in presence of occupant, members of the
family OR 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality
à Search may last for more than a day as long as it is part
of the same search for the same purpose and of the same
place (Uy Khetin vs. Villareal)
e. Peace officer leaves receipt with occupant at place
searched
f. Peace officer files return of search warrant and
inventory, and surrenders items seized to receiving court
(not necessarily court which issued the warrant)
à Items seized illegally must remain in custodia
legis pending resolution of the case (Roan vs. Gonzales)
6. Remedies from an unlawful search 3. Property which may furnish the arrestee with a
weapon against the arresting person
1. MTQ the warrant 4. Property which may be used as evidence at the
2. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally trial
taken 9. NOTES:
3. Return of property illegally seized
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2
7. When a search may be validly conducted without a
warrant The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
papers, houses and effects against unreasonable searches
1. Without consent of person searched
and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall
2. When the search is incident to a lawful arrest
be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest
3. Personal knowledge of the arresting person
shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined
(Posadas vs. CA)
personally by the judge after examination under oath or
4. Limited to:
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may

(1) Immediate time of arrest
(2) Immediate vicinity of the arrest
(3) Weapons and things which may be used as proof of
offense charged (Nolasco vs. Pano)
iii. Subject in an offense which is mala prohibita cannot
be summarily seized (Roan vs. Gonzales)
iv. May extend beyond arrestee to include premises and
surrounding under his immediate control
produce, and particularly describing the place to be
searched and the persons or things to be seized.
à Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 3
1. The privacy of communication and correspondence
shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the
court, or when public safety or order requires
otherwise as prescribed by law.
2. Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the
preceding section shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in the proceeding.

1. Border searches (customs, mail and airport) Rule 127 Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases

2. Vessels and aircrafts for violation of Tariff and

Customs Code, EXCEPT dwelling houses 1. Attachment as provisional remedy in criminal cases

3. Plain view
1. Accused is about to abscond from RP
4. Moving vehicle
2. Criminal action is based on a claim for money or
5. Hot pursuit
property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or
6. Stop-and-frisk, reasonable check-points
converted to the use of the accused who is a public
7. Private searches with no state action (People vs.
officer, or any officer of a corporation, or an
Marti)
attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk in a
8. Inspection of building and premises for
fiduciary capacity, in willful violation of duty
enforcement of fire, sanitary and building
3. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his
regulations
property, or is about to do so
4. Accused resides outside the RP
8. Person making the arrest may take from the arrestee

1. Properties used in the commission of the crime

2. Fruits or proceeds thereof